Replies to This Discussion

It reads -Dr. Mr. Burnell, I was pleased to learn that you met with Officer Scott A. Davis of the Montgomery County Police Department and that he was responsive to your needs. I am glad to have been able to help you with this matter and I wish you the best of luck.

I had an answer today from the Ethic Commitee in Sweden (SMER) it´s of course in Swedish, but it said shortly,that they do not look into individual cases, and that their assignment is to look over the hole research program in the country,and that science test done to each persons should be signed and consent by the involved person (execpt for a few-I wonder who those few are-us?) And if you think that you are exposed to such science tests, it should be filed to the policeoffice. But they also said- and this is important- that they have received several requests that claims focus and attention to look further into the ongoing Brain Science Tests. (so I guess that the more letter they get...)

The reply is not directly informative and affirms my inititial request in brief, with executive orders and other laws cited. They seem to speak in code.

I belive that the operational division of the nsa as opposed to the administration are commiting these radiation crimes as well as others.

I believe that the U.S. Presidents, whom signed the Cited Executive Orders are actively involved in criminal activity in this undercover surveillance world and not being held accountable, as well as their other agents and officers, as they do it all in secret protected by their own signatures, which is illegal.

since I have a certain amount of time to Appeal this Response, I was hoping maybe some of those on this email list had any idea's on how to proceed, so that I/we can formulate the best possible Appeal Reply to the F.O.I.L. Denial, Direct or Indirect.

Anyone who has been determined to fall under the auspices of Executive Order 12958, which was implemented at the beginning of the Iraqi War, could possibly challenge the determination if the following "conditions are" NOT "met" ...

(a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met:

(1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;

(2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government;

(3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and

(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.

(b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.

(c) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.

Sec. 1.2. Classification Levels.

(a) Information may be classified at one of the following three levels:

(1) “Top Secret” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

(2) “Secret” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

(3) “Confidential” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

(b) Except as otherwise provided by statute, no other terms shall be used to identify United States classified information.

Sec. 1.3. Classification Authority.

(a) The authority to classify information originally may be exercised only by:

(1) the President and, in the performance of executive duties, the Vice President;

(2) agency heads and officials designated by the President in the Federal Register; and

(3) United States Government officials delegated this authority pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.

(b) Officials authorized to classify information at a specified level are also authorized to classify information at a lower level.

(c) Delegation of original classification authority.

(1) Delegations of original classification authority shall be limited to the minimum required to administer this order. Agency heads are responsible for ensuring that designated subordinate officials have a demonstrable and continuing need to exercise this authority.

(2) “Top Secret” original classification authority may be delegated only by the President; in the performance of executive duties, the Vice President; or an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(3) “Secret” or “Confidential” original classification authority may be delegated only by the President; in the performance of executive duties, the Vice President; or an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section; or the senior agency official described in section 5.4(d) of this order, provided that official has been delegated “Top Secret” original classification authority by the agency head.

(4) Each delegation of original classification authority shall be in writing and the authority shall not be redelegated except as provided in this order. Each delegation shall identify the official by name or position title.

(d) Original classification authorities must receive training in original classification as provided in this order and its implementing directives. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and of the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be brought against an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.

(e) Exceptional cases. When an employee, government contractor, licensee, certificate holder, or grantee of an agency who does not have original classification authority originates information believed by that person to require classification, the information shall be protected in a manner consistent with this order and its implementing directives. The information shall be transmitted promptly as provided under this order or its implementing directives to the agency that has appropriate subject matter interest and classification authority with respect to this information. That agency shall decide within 30 days whether to classify this information. If it is not clear which agency has classification responsibility for this information, it shall be sent to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office. The Director shall determine the agency having primary subject matter interest and forward the information, with appropriate recommendations, to that agency for a classification determination.

Sec. 1.4. Classification Categories.

Information shall not be considered for classification unless it concerns:

(d) foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources;

(e) scientific, technological, or economic matters relating to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism;

(f) United States Government programs for safeguarding nuclear materials or facilities;

(g) vulnerabilities or capabilities of systems, installations, infrastructures, projects, plans, or protection services relating to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism; or

(h) weapons of mass destruction.

Sec. 1.5. Duration of Classification.

(a) At the time of original classification, the original classification authority shall attempt to establish a specific date or event for declassification based upon the duration of the national security sensitivity of the information. Upon reaching the date or event, the information shall be automatically declassified. The date or event shall not exceed the time frame established in paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) If the original classification authority cannot determine an earlier specific date or event for declassification, information shall be marked for declassification 10 years from the date of the original decision, unless the original classification authority otherwise determines that the sensitivity of the information requires that it shall be marked for declassification for up to 25 years from the date of the original decision. All information classified under this section shall be subject to section 3.3 of this order if it is contained in records of permanent historical value under title 44, United States Code.

(c) An original classification authority may extend the duration of classification, change the level of classification, or reclassify specific information only when the standards and procedures for classifying information under this order are followed.

(d) Information marked for an indefinite duration of classification under predecessor orders, for example, marked as “Originating Agency's Determination Required,” or information classified under predecessor orders that contains no declassification instructions shall be declassified in accordance with part 3 of this order.

Thousands of people are asking for an international investigation of enormous human rights violations that are silently taking place worldwide at this moment.

In recent years the numbers of those crimes against humanity rose so much that we can openly speak about the civilian population being under attack.

This attack is committed with technology working invisibly at a distance, beyond the bounds of borders, and is at this moment being used against helpless and unsuspecting citizens.

The victims are constantly lobbying to report these crimes to government officials, human rights organizations, world leaders and the press. Mostly, they don't get answers because of a general lack of knowledge about the technology. Mental institutions may diagnose the victims as delusional. And complaints lodged at local police stations are often treated as psychological problems or ignored.It may take several years, before the "silent holocaust" becomes public knowledge. And for the victims, the comparison is very real.

The scale of the crimes being reported, and the seriousness of the accusations, justifies an urgent international investigation.

Because there are so many victims worldwide, spawning a worldwide movement coordinated via the Internet, it is only the most diligent and conscientious of victims who are able to report this crime; the actual number of victims being many times larger than this group of activists.

In January 2007, the article "Mind Games" appeared in "The Washington Post", written by journalist Sharon Weinberger, about the American victims and the activist organization, Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance.

Meanwhile, from all parts of the world new victims are showing up in greater numbers. They are asking for these crimes to be made public and are insisting on an international investigation of this problem.And starting a collective campaign against abuses and tortures of the following:-

DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS; NEUROLOGICAL WEAPONS; MIND CONTROL WEAPONS; BODY AND BRAIN MANIPULATION WEAPONS; PSYCHOTRONIC WEAPONS; SPACE WEAPONS; NON-LETHAL WEAPONS; COINTELPRO; AND any other unacknowledged or as yet undeveloped means inflicting death or injury on, or damaging or destroying, a person (or the biological life, bodily health, mental health, or physical and economic well-being of a person) through the use of land-based, sea-based, or space-based systems using radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies directed at individual persons or targeted populations or the purpose of information war, mood management, or mind control of such persons or populations.Thank you and Best Regards!Your sincerely,

Here is the response letter that I received from Senator Rubio and the letters he wrote to the Presidential Bioethics Commission and President Obama. Thanks to all those whom helped write the letter and those who signed it, as well. We will contact his office on Wednesday @ 9:30am to follow up and thank the staff member who helped us. We will also contact Senator Udall's office and see if our information was submitted to the Oversight Committee. I hope you will all continue joining our calls as we are continuing to make progress.

Many months ago I sent an FOI request to two different Canadian government agencies (RCMP Complaints Commission and Canadian Human Rights Commission) regarding any information they have on file that mentions gang-stalking, watch lists, etc. I reported here earlier how they have both taken the full 90 days allowed to fill the request, PLUS an extra 60 days extension that they’re allowed under Section 9 of the Act.

In both cases, my request had to go to the Executive Director of the agency, it was that sensitive.

On Dec. 13, 2011, I contacted them both to remind them that the time limits were up, and asked if the information was on its way.

The RCMP Complaints Commission replied soon after and stated that they still needed more time. I haven’t heard from them since.

On Dec. 29, 2011, I received an email from the Human Rights Commission that stated that a package of information had been sent to me on Nov. 29, 2011, but had been returned to them.

I assumed that this was because my landlord (a perp) had decided to not accept any parcels for me because I had had a parcel stolen from my mail that was in his receivership, and he took offense to my reasonable suspicions that he or one of his staff (all perps) had been the thief.

Today (Jan. 9, 2012), I received an email from the RCMP Complaints Commission stating that the returned parcel was being resent by normal mail, but they also indicated that ANOTHER parcel that had been sent in December had not come back to them yet. I hadn’t known that there was a second parcel, and it was strange that this was only mentioned today.

I have a strong feeling that the machinations of the secret gang-stalking arm of the Canadian government are being applied to avoid delivering the information I have rightful access to. I suspect that they are fully aware of the problems I have with my mail (as they would if those events are tied together in a gang-stalking campaign against me), and are attempting to use it to their advantage, so as to avoid disclosure of information that will incriminate them.

We will see.

They need to understand, however, that they will only delay the inevitable, if this is the case...

Dear Senator Johnson,I understand that due to our, "War on Terror", we must be ever vigilant against further attacks on American soil.I understand that the Bush/Cheney, "Electronic Surveillance Initiative", may be a step that continues to be necessary, along with drones and satellite surveillance.I understand that every American is a suspect of domestic terrorism and as such must be surveilled - have our phone calls and emails analyzed for possible intelligence and our persons searched before entering a public facility.I understand that our Bill of Rights had to be pushed aside to allow for the pre-emptive measure of picking up possible domestic terrorists under the National Defense Authorization Act.What I don't understand is the extraordinary incompetence with the use of the micro-wave and laser technologies employed by our military, law enforcement and government contractors during surveillance. Is it really necessary to burn holes in my body while I am sleeping in order to keep America safe?Is there a fear that I may do some mischief while trying to sleep? Am I being punished for crimes and misdemeanors of which I am unaware?In this zeal for National Security, hideous human rights violations are being committed. I know because they are being committed against me.There is absolutely no reason to cook me alive, burn me, vibrate me and mistreat me. As this atrocity has been going on for some time, I have learned that the crimes and incompetence being perpetrated are covered up with accusations of mental illness on the part of the complainant. I can assure you that my mental health has been well documented.What I am seeking is a Congressional Investigation into the torture I have been subjected to. It is senseless, barbaric and as you well know illegal.I have attached only a couple of examples of what has been done to my person.I thank you for your prompt consideration.

Dear Ms. Becker,Thank you for contacting me regarding the "detainee" provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA).Defending our nation is a top priority of government. Accordingly, it is important that Congress pass defense authorization and appropriation bills so that military leaders can plan effectively and our troops can rest assured that their efforts will be funded. This year's defense authorization bill included language addressing the detainee policy for illegal combatants who have engaged, and been captured, in a war against America and our allies. From the war's beginning on September 11, 2001, the U.S. government has attempted to strike a delicate balance between security and civil liberties. It is not an easy task.On December 25, 2009, Umar FaroukAbdulmutallab, popularly referred to as the "Underwear Bomber," attempted to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253. Within 45 minutes of his arrest, his Miranda rights were read and invoked, effectively stopping all information gathering. His attempted bombing was certainly a crime, but it was also an act of war and he was an illegal combatant in that war. Our future security depends upon the military's ability to capture, detain, and interrogate our enemies in this war regardless of where they are found. This legislation reaffirms the authority for those detentions in an appropriately narrow fashion.I supported Senator Feinstein's amendment clarifying the limited legislative intent of the detainee measures. The amendment provides that "[n]othingin this section shall beconstrued to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of U.S. citizens or lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States." This bipartisan amendment passed 99 to 1.Additionally, the legislation requires military custody for captured members of al-Qaeda or associated groups who are planning or carrying out attacks against the United States or our coalition partners. This requirement does not apply to U.S. citizens. In cases of indefinite detention, including those at Guantanamo Bay, detainees are afforded due process.While I am sensitive to concerns about civil liberties and limited government we cannot ignore the fact that we live in a dangerous world. We face threats both at home and abroad. Our military must be able to plan and have the tools to keep America safe. National security officials need flexible approaches to face current and future security challenges. I will continue to work to give them the necessary and limited authority to accomplish this.Thank you again for taking the time to share your thoughts. It is important for me to hear the views and concerns of the people I serve. Since taking office, I have received over 300,000 pieces of correspondence and have had over 150,000 people participate in live forums and telephone town hall meetings. Please feel free to contact me in the future if I can further assist you or your family. It is an honor representing you and the good people of Wisconsin in the U.S. Senate.

Latest Activity

My prayer for you and for all of the TI’s: Dear heavenly Father, Thank you for giving us forgiveness for those who hate us, and those who are trying to kill, steal, and destroy us 24/7. We can only do that through You, because with You; all things are possible and nothing is impossible. We can do all things through Christ which strengthens us. I pray for all of the gang stalkers. May they be drawn to You Father God, and may they repent as Saul on the Road to Damascus. May the light of heaven…See More

"Avneet - I agree with a lot of what you have said.
Do you have proof of ocular implants, such as scans of your eyes? If people don`t have proof, they need to be wary of assuming they have been chipped/implanted, because it is possible to see…"

"hello tigsukire, yes the scary neighbours, in my village work a lot of perps now in talking bad and try to kill reputation,
and always this stupid streettheater???????
Well we overcame this, with the lords help!
a hug for you "